Latest news with #VKLingam
Malay Mail
4 days ago
- Politics
- Malay Mail
Calls for reforms must be sincere and not for political mileage — Hafiz Hassan
JULY 19 — Three months ago I wrote that the first reformative step towards strengthening the independence of the judiciary is to amend Article 122B(1) of the Federal Constitution. Article 122B(1) reads as follows: 'The Chief Justice of the Federal Court, the President of the Court of Appeal and the Chief Judges of the High Courts and (subject to Article 122C) the other judges of the Federal Court, of the Court of Appeal and of the High Courts shall be appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister, after consulting the Conference of Rulers.' (Emphasis added) Lest we forget, Article 122B(1) has been as it is since Malaysia Day on September 16, 1963. Over more than 60 years, the provision has seen two major judicial crises — the first in 1988, the second in 2007. In 2007, in a secretly recorded video, lawyer V.K. Lingam was heard telling the then chief justice on the phone that he could influence judicial appointments as he had the backing of former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad. This resulted in a royal inquiry. That episode followed the 1988 judicial crisis, when Mahathir sacked Chief Justice Salleh Abbas and several other top judges, effectively curbing the courts' power as an equal branch of government. In the 2007 episode, a number of persons were identified by the Royal Commission on the Lingam video clip as seriously undermining the independence and the integrity of the judiciary by their actions of fixing the appointment and promotion of judges. Below was what commission members concluded about Dr Mahathir Mohamad: 'The commission noted that Dr Mahathir did not follow the constitutional process of consulting the then Chief Justice Dzaiddin Abdullah in the appointment and promotion of judges. For example, when the then PM rejected Dzaiddin's choice of Malek Ahmad to fill in the vacancy as the Chief Judge of Malaya (CJM), he did not give any reasons. 'Instead, he directed Dzaiddin to choose between Ahmad Fairuz and Mohtar Abdullah as the next CJM. The commission noted that there was evidence that Lingam and his collaborators sabotaged Malek's candidacy by influencing Mahathir. In the video clip, Lingam told Fairuz that Malek was considered anti–Mahathir. '[Tan Sri] Malek Ahmad was a victim of character assassination by third parties who had their own axe to grind… this would not have happened if the PM had consulted [Tun] Dzaiddin as to why [Tan Sri] Malek Ahmad was considered to be unsuitable for appointment to the post of CJM. Nor were there reasons given why the PM considered [Tun] Ahmad Fairuz or [Tan Sri] Mohtar Abdullah better candidates. PM's letter was nothing short of a 'Hobson's choice' that one of the two should be chosen because they were PM's favoured candidates.' The commission ruled that an exclusive right in the executive to appoint judges without consultation is inimical to the doctrine of separation of powers and destructive of judicial independence. Lawyers gather for the Lawyer's Walk for Judicial Independence at the Palace of Justice, Putrajaya. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin Worse was to follow when Dzaiddin proposed five individuals as High Court judges in a letter to the PM in October 2001. This time the Chief Secretary to the Government picked five names of serving judicial commissioners for [Tun] Dzaiddin to choose two out of the five. No reasons were given to Dzaiddin why his choices were rejected. 'The PM cannot remember the reasons. His KSN (chief secretary) does not know the reasons. But there was somebody else who claimed to know the reasons. That somebody else is [Datuk] V.K. Lingam and he said that he achieved this with the participation of [Tan Sri] Vincent Tan and Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor when all three of them went to see the PM with this objective in mind,' noted the commission. In the video clip, Lingam discussed Dzaiddin's letter to the PM in October 2001 and told Fairuz that moves were underway to block the appointment of some of the names nominated by the then CJ. The commission noted that the Federal Constitution makes clear that the PM has to consult the CJ on appointments to the Bench. 'These were serious defaults in the constitutional process, because the mandatory requirement of consultation had not been complied with by persons who had taken an oath to uphold the Constitution. This kind of misbehaviour is so unprecedented that were it not for the release of the video clip it may never have come to light,' it added. Despite the commission's damning notes, Article 122B remains unamended — not even during Dr Mahathir's second term as PM when the elder statesman led a Cabinet of so-called reformist ministers and deputy ministers from PKR, DAP and Amanah. The calls for judicial reforms are most welcome and never too late but where were such calls when the reformists were in government in 2018? Let it be known that calls for judicial reforms had been made by no other than the late Sultan of Perak — a former top judge and head of the judiciary — in 2007 itself. According to His Royal Highness then, it was time the judiciary regain the public's confidence and bring back the glory years. 'I am driven nostalgically to look back to a time when our judiciary was the pride of the region and our neighbours spoke admiringly of our legal system. 'We were then second to none and the judgments of our courts were quoted confidently in other common law jurisdictions,' said His Royal Highness in his opening address at the 14th Malaysian Law Conference. The calls for reforms must be sincere and not for political mileage. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
![[UPDATED] AGC: Allegations of irregularities in judicial appointments unfounded, speculative](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.nst.com.my%2Fimages%2Farticles%2FAGC13-6_c87295008fbd4bbc8ef3673828c9caa3_1751943461.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
![[UPDATED] AGC: Allegations of irregularities in judicial appointments unfounded, speculative](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.nst.com.my%2Fassets%2FNST-Logo%402x.png%3Fid%3Db37a17055cb1ffea01f5&w=48&q=75){kind=small}
New Straits Times
08-07-2025
- Politics
- New Straits Times
[UPDATED] AGC: Allegations of irregularities in judicial appointments unfounded, speculative
KUALA LUMPUR: The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) has dismissed allegations of irregularities and delays in judicial appointments, saying that such claims must be assessed within the framework of the Federal Constitution. Responding to public statements made by Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli and several other PKR members of Parliament yesterday (July 7), the AGC said the prime minister cannot be viewed merely as a conduit for recommendations from any party, as he holds a constitutional responsibility to advise the King on judicial appointments. This duty, the statement said, is essential to safeguard the independence, credibility and integrity of the judiciary. The AGC added that the King had consented to the appointment of several High Court and Court of Appeal judges last month, but that these appointments were still undergoing necessary formalities. "Such appointments must be conducted with proper order and decorum," it said. Addressing claims that a Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) meeting had been convened without sufficient notice, the AGC said that under Section 13(2) of the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 (Act 695), the JAC is empowered to regulate its own procedures. In urgent circumstances, meetings can proceed with short notice if all members agree. "Procedural matters should not invalidate the JAC's deliberations unless there is clear evidence of mala fide intent or prejudice," it added. The AGC also addressed a serious allegation involving a Federal Court judge allegedly influencing judicial decisions and judge reassignments. It said deliberations within the JAC are legally protected and remain confidential, and such claims cannot be equated with proven misconduct or taken as a threat to judicial independence. "These remain premature and purely speculative allegations," it said. The AGC added that comparisons with the 2007 VK Lingam case were unwarranted, as that case involved clear evidence of interference, which led to the formation of a royal commission of inquiry (RCI). "In contrast, the current situation is based merely on unsubstantiated claims," the AGC said. Yesterday (July 7), nine PKR MPs called for an RCI to investigate what they claimed were alleged irregularities in the appointment of senior judges, including the Chief Justice. He claimed that nominations for the positions of Chief Justice and President of the Court of Appeal had already been decided by the JAC before the retirement of Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat and submitted to the prime minister, but the appointments were not made, resulting in the current vacancies. He also claimed a JAC meeting was called last Friday without adhering to the required 10-day notice period, allegedly to renominate candidates for the vacant positions. Led by Pandan MP and former PKR deputy president Rafizi, the group said they would formally request that proceedings and an inquiry be conducted by the Parliamentary Special Select Committee on Human Rights, Elections and Institutional Reform, including top government officials to testify. "The Parliament, as an independent legislative body, must play a key role in safeguarding the independence of the judiciary," he said in a special press conference. Rafizi outlined four issues surrounding the judicial appointment controversy which are now circulating in the public domain that require clarification from the government. This includes that in the appointment of new judges (whether to the High Court, Court of Appeal, or Federal Court), nominations submitted by the JAC to the government were not acted upon in a timely manner, leading to urgent vacancies.
Rakyat Post
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Rakyat Post
Senior PKR MPs Demand Royal Commission Over Judge Appointment Allegations
Subscribe to our FREE Nine PKR parliamentarians have called for a Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate serious allegations surrounding judicial appointments, drawing parallels to Malaysia's 2007 VK Lingam video scandal amid claims of attempted influence over court decisions and judge appointments. The demand was made during a special press conference on Monday, where the MPs outlined a comprehensive six-point action plan, including parliamentary investigations, nationwide public forums, and cross-party mobilisation, to address what they termed a crisis threatening judicial independence. Former PKR Deputy President Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli detailed four specific allegations requiring government explanation: First, nominations for new judges across all court levels submitted by the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) to the government have not been addressed appropriately, resulting in urgent vacancies. Second, nominations for the Chief Justice and Court of Appeal President positions had already been decided by JAC before Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat's retirement and submitted to the Prime Minister; however, appointments were not made, resulting in the current vacancies. Third, a JAC meeting was called last Friday without adhering to the required 10-day notice period to make fresh nominations for vacant positions. Most seriously, a Federal Court judge was summoned to a previous JAC meeting to explain allegations of attempting to influence case decisions and judge transfers – claims now substantiated by a police report filed by the judge. Echoes of the VK Lingam Scandal The MPs drew explicit parallels to the 2007 VK Lingam video scandal, noting that the Federal Court judge called before JAC was a former special officer to Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim in 2003—the same former Chief Justice implicated in the original scandal. 'The last time the judicial institution was embroiled in controversy involving allegations of influence over case decisions and judge appointments was the VK Lingam video scandal in 2007,' the MPs stated in their joint declaration. This historical connection has raised concerns among legal practitioners and civil society about potential attempts to influence judicial appointments and court decisions, mirroring the earlier scandal. Beyond demanding a Royal Commission, the MPs outlined an extensive response strategy. They will formally request that Parliament's Special Select Committee on Human Rights, Elections, and Institutional Reform investigate, including summoning the Prime Minister for testimony. A formal letter will be sent to the committee chairman, William Leong, and all members. MPs Launch Multi-Pronged Campaign Strategy The group plans to mobilise cross-party parliamentary support and launch nationwide public forums, beginning in Kuala Lumpur/Selangor on Sunday, 13 July, at 8:30 PM, before expanding to major cities nationwide. An online petition will be launched to demonstrate public support for defending judicial independence. Appointments to fill key judicial vacancies should be based on previous JAC proceedings rather than new nominations made amid the current controversy. The statement was jointly signed by nine PKR parliamentarians: Rafizi Ramli (Pandan), Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad (Setiawangsa), Wong Chen (Subang), Rodziah Ismail (Ampang), Zahir Hassan (Wangsa Maju), Datuk Muhammad Bakhtiar Wan Chik (Balik Pulau), Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh (Ledang), S Kesavan (Sungai Siput), and Onn Abu Bakar (Batu Pahat). Timing Amid Leadership Transition The allegations emerge during a critical transition period for Malaysia's judiciary. Tengku Maimun concluded her historic tenure as the country's first female Chief Justice on Wednesday after six years of service. The Federal Court's Chief Registrar's Office announced Thursday that Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Hasnah Mohammed Hashim would exercise Chief Justice powers under Article 131A of the Federal Constitution and relevant provisions of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964. The MPs urged Malaysians to pay attention to the controversy despite other competing issues, emphasising its significant future impact on the country and its citizens. We call on all Malaysians to pay attention to this issue which has major implications for the people and country in the future, even though it may seem trivial amid various other issues. The controversy represents a test of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's administration's commitment to judicial independence—a cornerstone principle of both PKR and Pakatan Harapan's political platform. Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Hasnah Mohammed Hashim named as acting CJ today. I remember in 2019, when Tun Richard Malanjum retired on 12 April, Tun Tengku Maimun was appointed as CJ on 2 May, some weeks later. I cannot recall at the time whether an acting CJ was appointed. — Syahredzan Johan (@syahredzan) Constitutional Framework The appointment arrangement was made in accordance with Article 131A of the Federal Constitution, as well as provisions under Section 9(1)(b) and Section 9(3) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 [Act 91]. The constitutional provisions ensure continuity in judicial leadership during transition periods; however, the allegations by PKR MPs raise concerns about the broader appointment process beyond this immediate arrangement. The PKR parliamentarians' demand for a Royal Commission reflects growing calls for transparency in judicial appointments, a critical component of Malaysia's separation of powers and judicial independence. Their allegations, if substantiated, could raise questions about the government's handling of judicial nominations and adherence to established procedures in the appointment process. The phrase "Soft strength wields the strongest power" finds its living embodiment in Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, Malaysia's first female Chief Justice, whose tenure has been marked not by flamboyance or force, but by quiet integrity, calm command, and unshakable adherence to… — Siti Kasim (@sitikasim) READ MORE : Share your thoughts with us via TRP's . Get more stories like this to your inbox by signing up for our newsletter.
Sinar Daily
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Sinar Daily
Judicial crisis should be nation's top priority, says Rafizi
He expressed disappointment over the lack of a clear response or direction from the administration of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim regarding the judiciary's leadership vacuum and rising allegations of interference. Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli - Photo by Bernama SUBANG JAYA – Pandan MP Rafizi Ramli has called for urgent attention to be given to the ongoing controversy surrounding Malaysia's judicial institution, describing it as the country's most pressing issue. Speaking on behalf of PKR backbenchers, Rafizi expressed disappointment over the lack of a clear response or direction from the administration of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim regarding the judiciary's leadership vacuum and rising allegations of interference. "As Members of Parliament (MPs), it is our duty to defend the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers between the three branches of government - the legislature, executive and judiciary," Rafizi said in a press conference, today. He stressed that defending judicial independence was a core value of both PKR and the Pakatan Harapan coalition. Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli and Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad. - BERNAMA FILE PIX What began as a controversy over vacant top judicial positions, Rafizi said, has escalated into a full-blown crisis following the emergence of more troubling information in the public domain. "These revelations risk damaging the government's credibility and eroding public confidence in the independence of our judiciary," he warned. Among the claims requiring official clarification, Rafizi listed: That judicial nominations submitted by the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) for the High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court have not been acted upon promptly, worsening the current vacancies. That nominations for the posts of Chief Justice and President of the Court of Appeal were submitted to the Prime Minister before the retirement of Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, but appointments were not made in time. That a JAC meeting was recently convened without the required 10-day notice to re-nominate candidates for the vacant posts. That a Federal Court judge was summoned to a JAC meeting to explain allegations of attempting to influence a court decision and judge reassignment. Rafizi revealed that a police report has already been lodged by an officer to the said judge, making the matter public knowledge. He drew parallels between the current situation and the 2007 VK Lingam scandal, which also involved alleged manipulation of judicial appointments and decisions. "The Federal Court judge involved in the current allegations was reportedly once a special officer to former Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, who was at the centre of the VK Lingam case," Rafizi said. Calling for concrete action, Rafizi proposed the following: The establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) to investigate the allegations outlined; A formal request for the Parliamentary Special Select Committee on Human Rights, Election and Institutional Reform to investigate the matter, including summoning the Prime Minister to testify; A halt to any new nominations for top judicial posts until the investigations by the RCI and Parliament are concluded; A bipartisan campaign among MPs to rally support for the proposed actions; A series of nationwide public forums to raise awareness and engage citizens, starting in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor on July 13; A national online petition to gather public support in defending the judiciary's independence. This issue, he said although it may seem minor compared to other issues, carried profound implications for the future of our democracy. He urged the people to remain vigilant and involved. Rafizi was speaking on behalf of eight others which included Setiawangsa MP Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, Subang MP Wong Chen, Ampang MP Rodziah Ismail, Wangsa Maju MP Zahir Hassan, Balik Pulau MP Datuk Muhammad Bakhtiar Wan Chik, Ledang MP Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh, Sungai Siput MP S Kesavan and Batu Pahat MP Onn Abu Bakar. At the same press conference, Nik Nazmi echoed Rafizi's call, stressing that judicial integrity has always been central to PKR's mission. "If we don't raise this issue, I feel we are not fulfilling our duty as MPs. "Some ask why this isn't handled internally, but this is a national issue of significant magnitude. As government backbenchers, we have the right and a responsibility to speak up," he said. He added that they had always maintained that backbenchers must be given room to voice their opinions. He said if the party could tolerate differing views on other matters, then surely on an issue as serious and substantive as this, there should be room for open expression. He believed the public appreciated such honesty. Nik Nazmi affirmed that both he and Rafizi were not bound by Cabinet collective responsibility, as they speak in their capacities as MPs. "This is our duty," he said.
